Medical and biomedical research productivity from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (2008-2012)

Congenital heart disease research landscape in the Arab world: a 25-year bibliometric review

Background

While research on congenital heart disease has been extensively conducted worldwide, comprehensive studies from developing countries and the Arab world remain scarce.

Aim

This study aims to perform a bibliometric review of research on congenital heart disease in the Arab world from 1997 to 2022.

Methods

We analyzed data from the Web of Science, encompassing various aspects such as topics, countries, research output, citations, authors, collaborations, and affiliations. This comprehensive science mapping analysis was done using the R statistical software's Bibliometrix Package.

Results

The research output from Arab countries over the 25 years showed an average annual growth rate of 11.5%. However, Arab countries exhibited lower research productivity than the United States and Europe, with a 24-fold difference. There was substantial variation in research output among 22 Arab countries, with five countries contributing to 78% of the total publications. Most of the published research was clinical, with limited innovative contributions and a preference for regional journals. High-income Arab countries displayed higher research productivity and citation rates than their low-income developing counterparts. Despite being categorized as upper-middle-income, post-conflict countries exhibited low research productivity. About one-quarter of the published articles (26%) resulted from collaborative efforts among multiple countries, with the United States being the most frequent collaborator. Enhanced research productivity and impact output were strongly associated with increased international cooperation.

Conclusion

Research productivity in the Arab region closely correlates with a country's GDP. Success hinges on governmental support, funding, international collaboration, and a clear research vision. These findings offer valuable insights for policymakers, educational institutions, and governments to strengthen research programs and nurture a research culture.

Impact of international collaboration on dentistry related papers published in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Objective

This bibliographic analysis was designed to review all dental publications in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) and evaluate the effect of international collaboration on the impact of published articles.

Methods

The Web of Science (WOS) database was used to extract all related published articles in the KSA from 1982 to 2021. The keywords were connected using Boolean Operators to download related articles. Downloaded articles were screened according to the following inclusion criteria: collaboration journal category, journal discipline, number of citations, number of authors, and impact factor. After applying the inclusion criteria and excluding single-author articles, 5,689 documents were included in the final analysis. The chi-square test and two-independent samples t-test were used to determine the statistical significance between the variables.

Results

A significantly higher proportion of articles with international collaboration (51.4%) were published in dental journals than those published nationally (43.3%) or within the institutional level (41.8%) (P < 0.0001). In addition, the average number of citations (9.28 ± 23.8) ranged from 0 to 749, received by an article and the impact factor of the journal in which the article was published, significantly higher in the case of internationally collaborative work compared with national or within institutional collaboration (P < 0.0001).

Conclusion

International collaboration positively affected the impact factor, number of citations, and quartile rank of published articles. Moreover, the number of co-authors in different countries contributes to the international collaboration effect.

Dermatology Publications in Saudi Arabia: A Fast-Growing Pattern

Bibliometric analysis provides an accurate report of the quantity and quality of research affiliated with a specific country. We aimed to use bibliometric analysis to evaluate previously published dermatology-related studies from Saudi Arabia (SA). We conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional bibliometric analysis using the Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus databases to retrieve all SA-affiliated dermatology research from the databases' respective dates of conception to July 9, 2021. The number of publications was determined by the total number of articles, the number of times an article was cited, publishing journals, and affiliated institutions. The Hirsch index (h-index) was used to describe the quality of the articles. In total, SA-affiliated dermatologists published 1,319 articles in WoS and Scopus. Approximately half (n=603) of these articles were published in the past six years. According to WoS, the total number of citations was 9,285 with more than half of all citations also occurring in the past six years. The International Journal of Dermatology was associated with the highest number of publications, followed by the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. SA had the second-highest number of publications in the Arab world. Our area has recently experienced rapid growth in dermatology publications. We encourage the use of data from the current study to identify the strengths and weaknesses of such publications, to direct researchers and funds to enhance the national growth of dermatology research, and to conduct periodic bibliometric analyses with the aim of assessing the quality and quantity of SA-affiliated publications over time.

Systematic review and pooled analysis of randomized controlled trials in countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC): Methods and quality assessment

OBJECTIVES

To describe variations in characteristics of randomized controlled trials conducted in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries, and critically appraising the quality of design, conduct and analysis of the trials.

METHODS

We carried out a systematically comprehensive electronic search of articles published between 1990 and 2018 and indexed in several databases: i) MEDLINE/PubMed, ii) EMBASE, iii) Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), iv) ClinicalTrials.gov, and v) World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We summarized the overall risk of bias present in all analyzed studies using the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool (CCRBT).

RESULTS

A remarkable shift in numbers of publications from 2006 onwards was found. The largest number of publications were from Saudi Arabia and consisted of hospitals/clinics based studies. Lack of randomization was found in the majority of reports, and nearly three-fourth of the studies involved the use of intention-to-treat (ITT) principle. However, the proportion of adequately generated random sequence methods has increased yearly, and this increase accounted for a relatively large proportion over the latter half of the studied period (p<0.001), in contrast to the proportion of allocation concealment and blinding. Journal impact factor was significantly correlated with the quality of random sequence generation (r=0.145; p=0.014).

CONCLUSION

The randomization methods have gained more attention over the last 3 decades. Secondly, Journal impact factor can serve as an indicator of randomization quality. To mitigate the large rate of overall high risk of bias in GCC studies, high-quality trials must be considered by ensuring adequate allocation concealment and blinding methods. PROSPERO No. ID: CRD42022310331.

Research in family medicine: Contribution, priorities, and barriers in Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

Research in family medicine is important. The objectives of this study were to explore the contribution of family physicians, their attitudes and practice, and the barriers to research in family medicine in Saudi Arabia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was conducted on Saudi family physicians in 2021. A self-administered questionnaire was sent to family physicians through WhatsApp and email. Information sought included demographic data, scientific profile, number of publications, reasons for conducting research, barriers to the conduct of research, attitudes and skills for the conduct of research, and priority areas of research. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 15. Descriptive statistics included mean and standard deviation for continuous variables and frequencies and percentages for categorical variables. Student's t-test was used to compare the means of two groups of physicians. Chi-square test and logistic regression analysis were performed to determine the association between categorical variables.

RESULTS

A total of 313 family physicians filled the questionnaire; majority were male (65%), were married (90%), and worked under the Ministry of Health (73%). The total number of publications since graduation was 1165 papers with an average of 3.8 papers per physician. More than 70% were interested in conducting research, and more than two-thirds considered research important to the advancement of family medicine. One-third of the family physicians were currently involved in conducting research, while 30% were supervising at least one research project. The top five areas of priority were chronic diseases, mental health, health promotion, quality of healthcare, and medical education/training; whereas the top five obstacles to the conduct of research were the lack of time, lack of research environment, lack of financial and technical support, and the absence of skills.

CONCLUSION

Saudi family physicians make a good contribution to research. The researchers and research bodies should focus on identifying the priority areas for research in family medicine in the next few years and provide support to achieve some of the objectives of the National Vision of 2030.

A mixed-method analysis to identify the current focus, trends, and gaps in health science research in Saudi Arabia

Background

The identification of current gaps in high-impact medical research in Saudi Arabia has international significance due to the trend of collaborative research in the field of health and medicine and the focus on knowledge-sharing. The purpose of this study is to assess the current focus, gaps, and priorities in health research in Saudi Arabia.

Methods

We employed a mixed-method research approach to achieve research objectives. (1) a systematic review of scientific research studies that are published between January 2020 to January 2022 in the top fifty Q1 medical science journals (2) a cross-sectional survey collected data from professionals employed in various organizations including the Ministry of Health (MoH), Ministry of Education (MoE), health organizations and universities, and the health industry. The close-ended survey questions inquired about the broad and specific areas of ongoing health research projects by these researchers and organizations in Saudi Arabia.

Results

The literature search on databases identified Science Direct (n = 741), Pub Med (n = 244) and Google Scholar (n = 15,600). After screening, (n = 26) original studies were selected for detailed evaluation and synthesis. Among these (n = 7) studied infectious diseases, (n = 7) cancer, and cardiac disease (n = 5). These studies focused on the etiology, treatment management and therapy outcomes of these health conditions. The survey was completed by (n = 384) respondents from these organizations. Most of the ongoing research projects focus on clinical sciences (27%) followed by basic sciences (24%) and public health research (24%) and a limited number of researchers were involved in healthcare management (2%) and informatics (2%). Most research focused on kidney and liver disorders (80%), obesity (74%), diabetes (74%), hormonal diseases (64%), and infectious disease (66%); it is equally important to design and fund research in some of the neglected areas including reproductive health (3%), physical and mental disabilities (1%).

Conclusion

Findings suggest that current gaps in original research from Saudi Arabia are in healthcare service quality, reproductive health, physical and mental disabilities and health informatics. Researchers and funding agencies and international collaborative projects should prioritize these areas.

The landscape of biomedical research progress, challenges and prospects in Saudi Arabia-A systematic review

Introduction

The main objective of this review was to synthesize the progress, challenges and prospects of biomedical research in Saudi Arabia in order to provide a holistic view to all stakeholders, such as policy makers, decision makers, and local researchers along with external collaborators interested in the field of biomedical research in this region.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted using the scientific literature for bibliometric studies in the field of biomedical research in Saudi Arabia that comprehensively covered past few decades using PubMed. The search was performed by combining verified Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms: "biomedical research", "bibliometrics", "Saudi Arabia" using boolean operator "AND". The data collection was done from January to June 2022 by both authors.

Results

Out of 202 articles yielded from initial search, 13 articles met all of the inclusion criteria and were examined in details. The outcome of analysis showed that with the augmentation of Research and Development (R&D) globalization in Saudi Arabia, researchers are publishing internationally and collaborating globally, academic and research centers are enriching research environment and policies, and government is taking many initiatives to bolster biomedical research; but still more improvements needs to be achieved by Saudi Arabia to be in the list of strong competitive leading nations in the global biomedical research field.

Conclusions

There were various key challenges related to biomedical publications and bibliometric aspects for Saudi Arabia that included: publishing preferences, quality of publications, indexing services, international scientific community, and importantly barriers related to planning, funding, training, resources and support at institutional and national levels. This review provided some insights and recommendations to enhance biomedical research in Saudi Arabia that included: effective policies, health priorities, building infrastructures, greater investments, high incentives, skilled recruitment, competitive training and engagement of community that can play a vital role in this context.

Journal of Family and Community Medicine: A scientometric analysis 1994-2020

The Journal of Family and Community Medicine (JFCM) is a peer-reviewed open access journal published by the Saudi Society of Family and Community Medicine. This review is aimed to analyze the scientometric attributes of manuscripts published over 27 years from 1994 to 2020 using scientometric technique. The bibliographic records of manuscripts published from 1994 to 2020 were retrieved from the Web of Science and Medline-PubMed databases. The data were analyzed by using VOSviewer, CiteSpace, and Biblioshiny software. A total of 648 manuscripts were included; these were written by 1442 authors, with an average of 2.22 authors per manuscript and 24 manuscripts per year. All manuscripts gained 2,693 citations with a mean ratio of 4.15 citations per manuscript. All the top-20 contributing authors belonged to Saudi Arabia, and 48% of the manuscripts were in the single-author pattern; the multiauthored manuscripts received a higher ratio of citations. The review highlighted the most contributing institutions and countries.Bibliographic coupling of countries, institutions, keywords co-occurrence, and co-citation of journals were also presented. The JFCM is an important journal of Saudi Arabia that has provided a platform to family medicine researchers to share their scholarly and scientific communication for the past 27 years. Over the years, the frequency and number of publications in the journal have improved. Although the journal has received manuscripts from all over the world, most contributions were from Saudi Arabia.

Understanding the study habits of Saudi residents in a psychiatry programme

OBJECTIVES

Understanding the way psychiatry residents select, consume, and prioritise their educational resources during their psychiatry residency programme is essential. The purpose of this study was to evaluate Saudi psychiatry residents' study habits during their residency training.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, 150 Saudi psychiatry residents were invited to complete an anonymous survey with 18 close-ended statements. The responses were recorded on a 5-point Likert scale. The survey included items about study volume, motivational factors, study resources, study methods, and overall satisfaction with training.

RESULTS

We received responses from 121 residents. There were more men (57.9%) than women (42.1%). A larger percentage of residents studied between two and five hours per day (30.6%). A larger proportion of residents did not agree that the psychiatry residency programme had some degree of protected time prior to their board exams (42.2%). The most crucial motivating factor for their study was the final board exam; 28.1% and 35.5% of residents ranked this factor as highly and very highly motivating, respectively. The most useful study resources were books such as Kaplan, Oxford, and Oral Board materials.

CONCLUSION

Our study is the first of its kind that provides insight into the study habits of Saudi psychiatry residents. The information can be used to improve the quality of training and medical education of psychiatry residents.

The quantity of health-related article publications from universities in Saudi Arabia: A bibliometric analysis, 2008-2017

Several studies have summarized the biomedical publications in Arab countries. However, the quantity of health-related article publications from universities in recent years in Saudi Arabia is unknown. Therefore, this study aimed to perform a bibliometric analysis that showcases the quantitative health-related article publications output from universities in Saudi Arabia between 2008 and 2017. An extensive literature search was conducted using the PubMed database. The search was limited to original research articles, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses published in the English language reporting on humans from medicine and health sciences colleges by researchers affiliated with any university in Saudi Arabia between January 2008 and December 2017. A total of 3172 articles were found published between January 2008 and December 2017. The number of publication output increased significantly (p = 0.0027) from 73 (2.3%) in 2008 to 721 (22.7%) in 2017. The highest quantity of publications came from the Riyadh region (n = 2257), specifically King Saud University (n = 1538). Of specific journals, the BioMed Central journals published the most articles by Saudi Arabian researchers (n = 112). The total number of publications increased from 2% to 24.8% by region. However, approximately 80% of the papers were published in journals with an impact factor (IF) <3. Around 3.8% of the papers were published in journals that had an IF ≥6 and has increased significantly (p = 0.030) from 0% to 1.2% in the past decade. The journal with the highest IF that published a high quantity of articles was the American Journal of Human Genetics. This study has identified a continuous significant increase in the publication of health-related articles from universities in Saudi Arabia. This study extended our knowledge of the quantity of scientific productivity in the field of medicine and health sciences over a recent decade.

Barriers to research productivity among gastroenterologists and hepatologists in Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

Clinical research is essential for the advancement of medical knowledge and evidence-based medical practice. In this study, we aimed to identify barriers that limit research productivity among gastroenterologists in Saudi Arabia.

METHODS

We conducted a national online survey targeting gastroenterologists in Saudi Arabia. Participants were asked about the patterns of their practice, their prior research activities, and potential barriers to research productivity. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to examine the association between different factors and research productivity.

RESULTS

A total of 85 gastroenterologists completed the survey. Respondents were predominantly male physicians (90.6%) and 40% of them belonged to the age group of 40-49 years. About 85.9% had at least one prior research participation of any type. Around 67.1% of the respondents had been a primary investigator at least once in the last 5 years, while only 23.5% had been a primary investigator at a minimum average rate of once a year. Multiple barriers to research productivity were identified: insufficient research time (78.8%), lack of funding and compensation (77.6%), lack of a statistician (68.2%), insufficient research training (64.7%), lack of connection (60%), lack of technical support (57.6%), and lack of interest (31%). On univariate analysis, insufficient research time and lack of funding and compensation were significantly associated with no research participation (P <0.01 and 0.03, respectively). On multivariate analysis, lack of funding and compensation was independently associated with no research participation (adjusted OR 15.32;95% C.I 2.66, 121.58, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Barriers to research productivity are highly prevalent among gastroenterologists in Saudi Arabia. Insufficient research time and lack of funding and compensation are the most common. Interventions are needed to promote research activities.

Asthma control factors in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries and the effectiveness of ICS/LABA fixed dose combinations: a dual rapid literature review

Background

Asthma control is influenced by multiple factors. These factors must be considered when appraising asthma interventions and their effectiveness in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries (Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates [UAE]). Based on published studies, the most prevalent asthma treatment in these countries are fixed dose combinations (FDC) of inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta-agonist (ICS/LABA). This study is a rapid review of the literature on: (a) factors associated with asthma control in the GCC countries and (b) generalisability of ICS/LABA FDC effectiveness studies.

Methods

To review local factors associated with asthma control and, generalisability of published ICS/LABA FDC studies, two rapid reviews were conducted. Review 1 targeted literature pertaining to asthma control factors in GCC countries. Eligible studies were appraised, and clustering methodology used to summarise factors. Review 2 assessed ICS/LABA FDC studies in conditions close to actual clinical practice (i.e. effectiveness studies). Eligibility was determined by reviewing study characteristics. Evaluation of studies focused on randomised controlled trials (RCTs). In both reviews, initial (January 2018) and updated (November 2019) searches were conducted in EMBASE and PubMed databases. Eligible studies were appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) checklists.

Results

We identified 51 publications reporting factors associated with asthma control. These publications reported studies conducted in Saudi Arabia (35), Qatar (5), Kuwait (5), UAE (3), Oman (1) and multiple countries (2). The most common factors associated with asthma control were: asthma-related education (13 articles), demographics (11articles), comorbidities (11 articles) and environmental exposures (11 articles). Review 2 identified 61 articles reporting ICS/LABA FDC effectiveness studies from countries outside of the GCC. Of these, six RCTs were critically appraised. The adequacy of RCTs in informing clinical practice varied when appraised against previously published criteria.

Conclusions

Asthma-related education was the most recurring factor associated with asthma control in the GCC countries. Moreover, the generalisability of ICS/LABA FDC studies to this region is variable. Hence, asthma patients in the region, particularly those on ICS/LABA FDC, will continue to require physician review and oversight. While our findings provide evidence for local treatment guidelines, further research is required in GCC countries to establish the causal pathways through which asthma-related education influence asthma control for patients on ICS/LABA FDC therapy.

Impact of critical care medicine publications from intensive care department at King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh in the last two decades

Introduction :

The volume and quality of biomedical research publications from an institution are considered adequate indicators of the quality of medical care in that institute. King Abdulaziz Medical City (KAMC), Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA), is one of the oldest and most distinguished medical centers in the country.

Methods:

In this study, we analyzed the number of publications from the Critical Care Unit of the hospital in the past two decades, from 1996 to 2016. The research publications were evaluated on various parameters. Moreover, the impact of their study on global medicine was determined.

Results:

Our results indicate a steady progression in the number of publications from the institute in the past two decades. An average of 17.3 papers was published each year during this time. Out of the 283 publications from KAMC included in this study, the majority of the publications were original articles, 61 were review articles, 66 were multicenter trial studies and 28 were randomized control trials. The citation profile of the publications was good indicating global impact of the studies.

Conclusion:

The global impact of research as evaluated through published manuscripts in KAMC is overall good. This was deduced from both the increase in the number of publications each year and also the quality of papers as evidenced by the citation index of the papers published between 1996 and 2016.

Publications pattern of dermatology research in Saudi Arabia

Objectives:

To analyze the quantity and characteristics of Saudi Arabia’s (SA’s) dermatology research publications throughout the years.

Methods:

A literature search was conducted between October 2018 and July 2019 in the Dermatology Department, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. PubMed was used as a search engine, to retrieve dermatology-related publications in SA - from the date of the first article publication in 1982 to December 31, 2018.

Results:

Five hundred publications were included. Two-thirds of them were written between 2010 and 2018. Approximately 50% were from the central region and only 3% were multiregional studies. Funding support was described in 13% of these publications. The top 5 most-researched fields were infectious disorders (12%), genodermatosis (10%), hypopigmentation disorders (9.4%), neoplastic disorders (9%), and hair disorders (7%). Two-thirds of the publications were observational studies, and mostly case reports (44%).

Conclusion:

Dermatology research in SA has increased over the past decade. However, the quality of research remains inadequate. Saudi Arabia’s dermatology research output is affected by the availability of funding and national research projects, which could improve the studies’ quality. We recommend the establishment of data registry units that can aid researchers in producing high-quality studies, while encouraging the collaboration of different centers in various SA regions (and abroad) to conduct research with generalizable results.

Research Productivity in the Health Sciences in Saudi Arabia: 2008-2017

The purpose of this study was to analyze the published research on health sciences carried out by researchers in Saudi Arabia in the last decade by assessing bibliometric output. Data for 2008 to 2017 was retrieved from Scopus. During this period, there was significant growth, from 1332 publications in 2008 to 5529 in 2017, with an average annual growth rate of 14.1%. King Saud University was the most productive institution. Most of the published research was done in collaboration with Egypt. The subject area of medicine was predominant with the main publication source being the Saudi Medical Journal, Life Science Journal, the Acta Zhengzhou University Oversea Version, and the Annals of Saudi Medicine, primarily in the form of original research articles. The growing trend in publications is a sign of the increasing quality of education and more research and development activities, which are made possible by a sufficient budget allocation to these activities during the last decade.

Scientometric Evaluation of Research Productivity on Diabetes from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia over the Last Two Decades (2000-2019)

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data was extracted from the Web of Science (WoS) platform and later bibliometric analysis performed using the "R-Bibliometrix" package. A wide range of indicators was explored to measure the quantity and quality of the publications related to diabetes from KSA.

RESULTS

Saudi Arabia was 28th in rank with 2600 documents (0.83% of global share). Articles were the main document type (76%). The total number of authors was 9715 from 104 countries. Three authors showed >50 publications and >100 total citations while 2 authors showed an H-index of ≥20. The USA, UK, and Egypt were other leading contributive countries in terms of corresponding authors and total citations per country. King Saud University was the major contributing affiliation followed by King Abdulaziz University. Among 865 sources, Saudi Medical Journal was the leading and consistent source over the years. Diabetes, Diabetes Mellitus, and Type 2 Diabetes were the most frequently used keywords.

CONCLUSION

This study provides a macroscopic overview of diabetes-related research output from KSA. Overall, similar identifications and trends of top authors were observed in terms of productivity, impact, international collaborations, and organizational affiliations. Generally, an increasing productivity trend was observed with the majority published in the last 5 to 10 years. Study findings can benefit relevant stakeholders to better understand the trends and performance of diabetes-related regional research.

Family Medicine Research Productivity in Saudi Arabia for 15 Years: An Urgent Call for Action

Family medicine is one of the most vital health specialties in the field of medicine. This can be attributed to the wide range of health services for all people regardless of age, gender, and diagnosis. Saudi Arabia as suggested by various studies put more of its attention at all levels to family medicine in order to produce an adequate number of family physicians and improve both the academic aspects and the services provided by family medicine in the country. Thus, a comprehensive national survey was suggested to analyze the current situation of the specialty in the country and to draw up a strategic plan to achieve the national vision for family medicine by 2020. In light of the aforementioned, this study deemed it necessary to examine family medicine research productivity in Saudi Arabia in order to recommend possible measures to increase the quality of research output related to the field. The Web of Science (WoS) bibliographic database search engine was used to retrieve and analyze data. The terms “Family Medicine” and “Saudi Arabia” were entered in the search address fields using the SAME boolean operator (i.e., Family Medicine SAME Saudi Arabia) to retrieve records that contained these two terms and were in the same address. Research articles that were published from 1 January 2004 to 31 December 2018 were included for data analysis. Publication details such as the year of publication, document type, research area, authors’ affiliation, journal name, international collaborators, journal impact factor (JIF), and citation reports were all considered in the analysis. As for the result, Saudi Arabia’s research productivity in the field of family medicine is very poor, with a very gradual linear increase over the last 15 years. Further, health institutions have low research productivity compared to universities and medical colleges. Finally, most of the publications were published in low- or no-impact-factor journals. Therefore, this study concludes that Saudi Arabia has had low research productivity in family medicine. It recommends that an educational research program with the supervision of Ministry of Health (MOH) be implemented among family medicine physicians featuring organizational support and well-structured communication between health and educational institutions to increase research productivity in the country.

Publications from Saudi Arabia in Plastic Surgery in the Recent Five Years

In the last 5 years, many universities and medical centers have contributed immensely to medical research in Saudi Arabia. The aim of this study is to review the publications in the last 5 years in the field of plastic and reconstructive surgery from Saudi Arabia.

Systematic review on the quality of randomized controlled trials from Saudi Arabia

Background

The quality of randomized controlled trials from Saudi Arabia is unknown since most are observational studies.

Objective

To determine (1) the quantity and quality of randomized controlled trials published from Saudi Arabia, and (2) whether significance of intervention effect varied by study quality.

Methods

PubMed, SCOPUS, and Cochrane were searched with keywords for trials published from Saudi Arabia until February 2018. A total of 422 records were identified and screened, resulting in 61 eligible trials for analysis. Two researchers abstracted trial characteristics and assessed quality in seven domains (randomization, allocation concealment, blinding of assessors or participants, incomplete outcome data, selective reporting, and other sources of bias) using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool.

Results

A majority of the trials (57%) were published during 2010–2018. High risk of bias was present for blinding (outcome: 13%; participants and personnel: 28%). Biases could not be assessed due to lack of information (unclear risk) in the domains of randomization (54%), allocation concealment (44%), and blinding of outcome assessment (57%). When all seven domains were considered together (summary risk of bias), 0% of the trials had low risk, 39% had high risk, and 61% had unclear risk of biases. A greater proportion of high-risk trials had significant intervention effect than unclear-risk trials (79% vs. 67%).

Conclusion

The volume and quality of trials in Saudi Arabia was low. More high-quality randomized controlled trials are warranted to address chronic diseases.

Utilisation of hospital information systems for medical research in Saudi Arabia: A mixed-method exploration of the views of healthcare and IT professionals involved in hospital database management systems

BACKGROUND

Although in recent times the Saudi government has paid much attention to the adaptation of hospital information systems (HIS) and electronic medical records (EMR), the importance of utilising HIS to enhance medical research has been neglected.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to (i) investigate the current state of medical research in Saudi Arabia, (ii) identify possible issues that hinder improvement of medical research and (iii) identify possible solutions to enhance the role of HIS in medical research in Saudi Arabia.

METHOD

We used a questionnaire and structured interview approach. Questionnaires were distributed to Saudi healthcare professionals. One hundred responses to our questionnaire were captured by the online Google Form designed specifically for our survey. Structured interviews with two IT professionals were conducted regarding technical aspects of their hospital data management systems.

RESULTS

Six themes contributing to the inefficacy of HIS in medical research in Saudi Arabia emerged from the data: incorrect datasets, difficult data collection and storage, poor data analytics, a lack of system interoperability across different HIS for universal access and negative perception of the usefulness of HIS for medical research.

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS

Our findings suggest (i) cloud-based HIS would support efficient, reliable and integrated data collection and storage across all hospitals in Saudi Arabia; (ii) EMR data sources should be seamlessly linked to avoid incomplete, fragmented or erroneous EMR in Saudi Arabia; and (iii) collaboration between all hospitals in Saudi Arabia to adopt a uniform standard to support interoperability and improve data exchange and integration is necessary.

Evaluating the Published Critical Care Research from the World Health Organization Eastern Mediterranean Region

Objectives

Evaluation of published research in a region provides insight into relevant aspects of clinical care and research priorities. This study aimed to provide a comprehensive assessment of the type of critical care research published in the World Health Organization Eastern Mediterranean region (EMR) over a 10-year period.

Results

During the study period (2007–2016), the search strategy revealed 4303 publications, of which 1537 were included in the analysis; studies were excluded for the following reasons: not critical care, conducted in non-EMR countries, editorials, case reports, in-vitro or animal studies, as well as those conducted in multiple countries and those that evaluated foreign military personal. Countries varied in the number of publications produced, ranging from none in Somalia to 620 in Iran. The majority of the studies were observational (78%), evaluated adults (73%), and the most common areas of research were infectious (29%) and respiratory (10%) diseases. Median sample size was 120 and the mean (SD) impact factor of the journals in which the articles were published was 1.02 (0.7).

Neurology Research in Saudi Arabia: Urgent call for action

OBJECTIVES

Research activities in Saudi Arabia are promoted at the governmental and institutional levels. However, the output and quality of research conducted in the field of neurology has not yet been measured quantitatively. This study therefore aimed to analyse neurology-related publications from Saudi Arabia.

METHODS

This study was conducted in January 2016. A systematic search using the PubMed^® search engine (National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, Maryland, USA) was conducted to identify all neurology-related articles published from Saudi Arabia between January 1996 and December 2015.

RESULTS

A total of 1,292 neurology-related publications were identified. Neurology research increased linearly with time, with most publications originating from Riyadh (67%) and the university sector (≈47%). However, most neurology-related articles were published in journals which had an impact factor of <1 (55%).

CONCLUSION

Neurology research in Saudi Arabia has increased substantially over the last 20 years. However, as most articles were published in low-impact journals, the quality of research remains inadequate and should be improved. It is important that an official research culture be established in both governmental and private universities as well as colleges and health institutions in Saudi Arabia. The formation of clinical academic departments staffed by research experts is recommended to ensure the quality of neurology research output.

Primary health care research in Saudi Arabia: A quantitative analysis

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to analyze the published primary health care (PHC) research conducted in Saudi Arabia quantitatively and to determine the distribution of these research publications according to the topic, time, geographical location, and institution.

METHODS

In this descriptive study, we conducted literature search in PubMed and Google Scholar. The Medical Subject Headings terms: "Primary Health" AND "Saudi" and "Primary Care" AND "Saudi" were used for searching relevant journal articles. Relevant information about the journal articles, published till December 2011, was recorded on a coding instrument.

RESULTS

From 1983 to 2011, a total of 655 PHC research articles were found. The publication output showed an increase with time. Original research articles (85.6%) were the main type of publications, and the most common study design was cross-sectional (93.4%). "Chronic diseases" and "health services research" were the main topics addressed. Riyadh province had the highest proportion (46.3%) of publications, and the universities (56.2%), followed by the Saudi Ministry of Health (24.9%), were the main institutions publishing the research.

CONCLUSION

Despite a well-established PHC setup in Saudi Arabia, the research outputs are low. Most of the published articles are cross-sectional studies and are conducted by the universities. Enhancing the PHC research by creating a supportive environment will lead to an increased evidence base for PHC and its effective translation into service delivery.

Comparative analysis of quantity and quality of biomedical publications in Gulf Cooperation Council countries from 2011-2013

Objectives:

To compare the research productivity of different Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries in the field of biomedical sciences from 2011-2013.

Methods:

This is a retrospective study conducted in the College of Medicine, Alfaisal University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Data on the biomedical publications originating from GCC countries published between January 2011 to December 2013 was searched via MEDLINE using PubMed. The total number of publications emanating from each country was normalized with the country’s population. The mean impact factor (IF) of all the publications in a year was calculated for comparative analysis.

Results:

A total of 11,000 publications were retrieved via MEDLINE using PubMed, out of which, 9222 were selected for analysis. A successive increase in the number of publications by every country was observed. The most striking increase in the number of publications was from Saudi Arabia. However, after normalization with population, the performance of Oman, Qatar, and Kuwait looks far better than Saudi Arabia in terms of research productivity. Data on mean IF showed that the overall mean IF of all GCC countries has remained largely unchanged except Oman. Although Oman had a comparatively low mean IF value in 2011, they recorded a tremendous improvement in successive years.

Conclusion:

All GCC countries underwent an increase in quantitative research productivity over the last 3 years. However, no increase in quality of research publications was noted based on the proxy reports of mean journal IF.